2) Your king has made sure there will be no "real millionaire" for years if not decades. So the idea that it will suddenly be decentralized in near future is false.

This is very simple. The more people sign on to the SolidCoin network, the faster the coins will inflate, and the faster we will have our first millionare.

Wrong. It doesn't matter how many people sign on to the network. There will be 5 coins generated every 2 minutes no matter how many people start using SolidCoin. A miner that maintains a massive 10% of the entire network hashpower will take 8 years to become a control node. It's highly unlikely that anyone will ever become a control node.

No you're WRONG, like the many hundreds of mis-informed FUD postings in this stupid forum.

"Another thing to remember is that with the difficulty modifier in place, it's not just "each block is worth 5SC" now. For each 100K of difficulty another 5SC is added. So at our current difficulty of 40000 an extra 40% of 5SC would be added, a block would be worth 7SC. With 5 blocks every 10 minutes, that means a total of 35SC would be generated in 10 minutes vs Bitcoins ideal of 50BTC. This is at current difficulty. As difficulty grows and we get more miners the amount of SolidCoins generated per hour will match that growth, whilst still maintaining a base cost of 10-30c of electricity to generate it."

While your are correct it is immaterial. Bitcoin doesn't have a 12M "control premine". Even if the generation rate increased by 300% to ~20SC there are only 262,800 blocks per year so that ~5M per year. To overcome the "King's blockade" would require over 2 years and this is if a single person owned every single coin. If say the richest person (er 2nd richest person behind King RealScam) had 10% of coins in circulation that would require ~120M coins. At 5M per years that is more than 2 DECADES. Also at any point in the future King RealScam could simply prohibit any new control nodes keeping absolute control into perpetuity.

EDIT: And btw we can always fork the latest version if any "Reckless Decision Making" is exhibited from the "trusted individuals". That's why I am not worried,and why my number one priority was to get the source out.

No you can't fork it. You can use the code only at the express and limited permission of King RealScam. Source code is not Open Source. I (through my employer) have access to the source code for many components of the Windows Operating System. It isn't open source. The code exists only to further windows and the goals of Microsoft.

You have no legal right to fork the project. Your access to use, modify, and redistribute the source is limited to the SolidCoin project. You have no technical means to prevent theft, fraud, or ill-intent by those who have complete control of the network. You have no means to reject changes forced by the control nodes.

You simply have blind and implicit faith that King RealScam won't do anything wrong. You know what .... maybe he won't. However the very fact that you MUST trust him is a fatal flaw even if that trust isn't misplaced.

As I said in another thread on the subject, SolidCoin is good for Bitcoin, because it's a lightning rod for complete morons. It brings Bitcoin's "idiot factor" down a notch or 6, and that's great for Bitcoin.

I for one eagerly await SolidCoin 6.0, where every legitimate transaction must be double-signed with RealSolid's private key and you have to sign an NDA to mine.

As I said in another thread on the subject, SolidCoin is good for Bitcoin, because it's a lightning rod for complete morons. It brings Bitcoin's "idiot factor" down a notch or 6, and that's great for Bitcoin.

This.

At this point, arguing the merits of what Solidcoin is and is not is pointless. Solidcoin can be morphed into whatever RealSolid wants it to be. He has utter control over every aspect of the client and block-chain. Any time anyone complains about any feature, one can "promise" that feature will be moderated or mitigated by RealSolid.

Why would anyone bother trying to hack the Solidcoin client, just break into RealSolid's development box and take the private keys that control the blockchain. If someone hasn't already.

I did not took part in all these conversations, but now I want to ask.Where's the scam?I bought some solidcoins long ago when Solidcoin just started. I still have my solidcoins, they are even a little higher in price, the project is going forward.I understand that something is centralized. I understand that some people hate Solidcoin for IDEOLOGICAL reasons. But they use the word "scam" all the time. Isn't it dishonest?I want to know:WHO STOLE WHO'S MONEY?WHO SCAMMED WHO?IS SOMEBODY A SCAMMER BECAUSE HE MAY DO IT IN THE FUTURE?Or if you are the member of some cryptodecentralisation sect, you may say what you want and use any words? Why not call Coinhunter a murderer?

I did not took part in all these conversations, but now I want to ask.Where's the scam?I bought some solidcoins long ago when Solidcoin just started. I still have my solidcoins, they are even a little higher in price, the project is going forward.I understand that something is centralized. I understand that some people hate Solidcoin for IDEOLOGICAL reasons. But they use the word "scam" all the time. Isn't it dishonest?I want to know:WHO STOLE WHO'S MONEY?WHO SCAMMED WHO?IS SOMEBODY A SCAMMER BECAUSE HE MAY DO IT IN THE FUTURE?Or if you are the member of some cryptodecentralisation sect, you may say what you want and use any words? Why not call Coinhunter a murderer?

I did not took part in all these conversations, but now I want to ask.Where's the scam?I bought some solidcoins long ago when Solidcoin just started. I still have my solidcoins, they are even a little higher in price, the project is going forward.I understand that something is centralized. I understand that some people hate Solidcoin for IDEOLOGICAL reasons. But they use the word "scam" all the time. Isn't it dishonest?I want to know:WHO STOLE WHO'S MONEY?WHO SCAMMED WHO?IS SOMEBODY A SCAMMER BECAUSE HE MAY DO IT IN THE FUTURE?Or if you are the member of some cryptodecentralization sect, you may say what you want and use any words? Why not call Coinhunter a murderer?

Well, not exactly the same situation. Coinhunter managed to defend my coins while I slept. If I had lost them, I would be more upset no matter what rules had changed. And I even don't understand exactly what's the difference. All these talks about trusted nodes are for geeks, and I'm grandma. I have my coins, I didn't bought the idea of decentralization.Who bought some ideas? Who paid for decentralization? When common people see the word Scam they understand that somebody stole money.

Well, not exactly the same situation. Coinhunter managed to defend my coins while I slept. If I had lost them, I would be more upset no matter what rules had changed. And I even don't understand exactly what's the difference. All these talks about trusted nodes are for geeks, and I'm grandma. When common people see the word Scam they understand that somebody stole money.

Well generally a scam artist requires the victim to be ignorant so looks like he is doing something right. I don't know how you consider someone minting 12M coins out of thin air, giving himself a 10% tax, implementing 100% control into the network, making changes to payouts to ensure only he will ever be in control, stealing source code from Bitcoin, changing the license of SolidCoin from OpenSource to proprietary closed source license which gives him complete ownership, ripping off the Intellectual property of Oracle and then continually using decit, misdirection, and obfuscation to hide all of these events so they have only been found little by little over the course of a month .... anything but a scam.

OK, that are different approaches.Still the last, main question:Who's the victim?Please name yourself and tell how did you suffer?

My description:

Quote

Sue goes to the Marketplace forums, and says 'I have a 5850 for sale. It's brand new with an aftermarket heat-sink included. Send me 150 BTC and it's yours.'

People then weigh take variables into account before they invest. They weigh their long-term electric cost, initial cost, they are able to weigh how much a 5850 and an aftermarket heatsink are worth to them, before they spend their money.

Now Sue sends instead a 5770 with no heat-sink at all. Though a 5770 is still technically a graphics card, what was received is not what was advertised. Or what if the card was broken? Or what if Sue left out the heatsink? Further, what if any of those things happened and it was proven that Sue had prior knowledge? Or what if Sue used the defense she made a 'decision' she thought was best for you, without your input? Sue would be labeled a scammer for accepting peoples investment and changing the terms of the sale after the fact.

CoinHunter goes to the Cryptocurrency forums, and says 'I have an investment opportunity. If you invest X money (based on your electricity and hardware cost), you'll receive Y (coin reward) over Z period (time it takes to find a block), according to N parameters (design of SC). People then weigh all those variables into account before they invest.

Coinhunter has adjusted and concealed many variables people must weigh in order to make a proper investment. Further, CoinHunter has lied about his own 'earnings', to a tune of holding a whopping ~85% of the current coin supply. Coinhunter has changed the Y reward and N parameters directly, after initial investment was made. The investment made by those people, whether it be through buying on an exchange or contributing hashes to the blockchain, were done under the guise of A terms, but coinhunter executed the investment under B terms, of which B terms are directly beneficial to Coinhunter and directly detrimental to the investor.

Whether it be 1.0 -> 2.0, or 2.0 w/12m 'unspendable -> 2.0 w/12m VERY spendable, or 2.0 32sc/blk -> 2.0 5sc/blk. I'm sure there are other ways to break it down, but at this point if you can't see that SC is a scam... then you're exactly the kind of investor Coinhunter is looking for: gullible.

OK, that are different approaches.Still the last, main question:Who's the victim?Please name yourself and tell how did you suffer?

My description:

Quote

Sue goes to the Marketplace forums, and says 'I have a 5850 for sale. It's brand new with an aftermarket heat-sink included. Send me 150 BTC and it's yours.'

People then weigh take variables into account before they invest. They weigh their long-term electric cost, initial cost, they are able to weigh how much a 5850 and an aftermarket heatsink are worth to them, before they spend their money.

Now Sue sends instead a 5770 with no heat-sink at all. Though a 5770 is still technically a graphics card, what was received is not what was advertised. Or what if the card was broken? Or what if Sue left out the heatsink? Further, what if any of those things happened and it was proven that Sue had prior knowledge? Or what if Sue used the defense she made a 'decision' she thought was best for you, without your input? Sue would be labeled a scammer for accepting peoples investment and changing the terms of the sale after the fact.

CoinHunter goes to the Cryptocurrency forums, and says 'I have an investment opportunity. If you invest X money (based on your electricity and hardware cost), you'll receive Y (coin reward) over Z period (time it takes to find a block), according to N parameters (design of SC). People then weigh all those variables into account before they invest.

Coinhunter has adjusted and concealed many variables people must weigh in order to make a proper investment. Further, CoinHunter has lied about his own 'earnings', to a tune of holding a whopping ~85% of the current coin supply. Coinhunter has changed the Y reward and N parameters directly, after initial investment was made. The investment made by those people, whether it be through buying on an exchange or contributing hashes to the blockchain, were done under the guise of A terms, but coinhunter executed the investment under B terms, of which B terms are directly beneficial to Coinhunter and directly detrimental to the investor.

Whether it be 1.0 -> 2.0, or 2.0 w/12m 'unspendable -> 2.0 w/12m VERY spendable, or 2.0 32sc/blk -> 2.0 5sc/blk. I'm sure there are other ways to break it down, but at this point if you can't see that SC is a scam... then you're exactly the kind of investor Coinhunter is looking for: gullible.

A "Scam" does not necessarily need an actual theft to occur for it to be a fraud. If I create a mechanism; be it an investment instrument, a computer program, a descriptive brochure, or a physical item, of gaining your wealth with deceptive means, I have become a scammer and am committing a fraud whether you buy it or not. The investment might be in a worthless stock, the computer program might not do what I advertise it as doing, the brochure could be intentionally misleading and the item might be worthless swampland described as prime Florida real estate, or a lovely bridge that I do not own the rights to that I am offering for sale. By presenting this item for sale or transfer, the scam is committed. It does not require a victim to be defined, it only needs victims to succeed. The fact of the fraud remains.

If SolidCoin had been developed as an alternate cryptocurrency, released and allowed to develop its place in the world of alt-currencies without intent to deceive or mislead, then it would stand on the merits of its programming and function. It would be adopted and find utility in the markets based on how well it meets the needs of the users. Instead, SolidCoin was developed under a massive shroud of secrecy and false promises. Each new comment was directed at a feature that would hasten the demise of all other currencies because SolidCoin had features that were absolutely perfect in every way, and addressed every perceived flaw in any other currency, including fiat, and apparently the currency of trust between the governed and the government.

The original release was abruptly pulled from free and open trade under threat of attack in a very short time frame. Those investors who held version 1 SolidCoins at that time lost the entire value of their investment held when the currency ended production. There were representations made that they would somehow be made whole when a new and improved SolidCoin was released in the future. Eventually version 2 SolidCoin was released, under a radically different production scheme. Taking a stance of being gpu hostile and cpu friendly, the manner in which the new SolidCoins are produced was a complete departure from the trust that the original investors had, and relegated any hardware investment they might have made to accomplish the production of version 1 SolidCoins to waste. The new SolidCoin was misrepresented in a number of crucial ways, these have been documented ad nauseum on this board, and elsewhere, suffice to say, the potential users of SolidCoin found a number of very compelling reasons to confront the claims made by the developer of SolidCoin. The response from that developer, and his supporters was vociferous in the extreme, shouting defense of their system. One of the hallmarks of a fraud is the volume with which the scammers promote their fraud. Drowning out the opposition is a time-testing technique to gain traction with your scams. There have been significant untruths presented from the developer and the supporters of SolidCoin, and the program when first released was badly flawed, reporting false production rates, blocking certain transactions, and affecting systems in a negative way. Close observation of the program, and later examination, of the source released as SolidCoin 2.01 showed that there were a host of features that worked in exactly opposite the way the product was described.

Without semantic arguments about the definition of "centralized" or not, the code clearly and irrefutably gives absolute control over the production and distribution of SolidCoin 2.0 to someone other than the person responsible for mining it. The product of their mining work has been drastically reduced as a method of improving the value of the coins, solely at the whim of the same person who controls the distribution and production of those coins. This same entity owns a overpowering majority of these coins in a format that was claimed to be "un-spendable" but has been now proven, by the code itself, to be open to transfer. Again- if I tell you one thing, and sell you something completely different, then I have at best lied to you and taken advantage of you, but the world has a stronger definition of that- it is a scam and I would be committing fraud.

So- to directly answer your question- who is the victim? The entire crypto-currency community is the victim. We have all been lied to and sold a constantly shifting, never-quite-what-it-is-represented-as product. We are told that repairs can be made, problems fixed, or that we fail to understand the genius behind a system that can be controlled by a single person. We have been promised Open Source, and we find pirated code, that is Opened only after significant resources have been dumped into the morass of mining for SolidCoin. We were told that it was proof against all enemies, domestic and foreign; instead we find that it creates secret millionaires, offers parallel mining capabilities, and has a flexible payout scheme that is controlled by one person, who did not reduce his personal stash of wealth by 80% when he limited the world's ability to produce his coins by 80%.

Having this badly flawed product out there vociferously protesting that it is perfect, and attacking all other crypto-currencies with paid shills and hawkers is the fraud. We are the victims.

You do not need to lose money for it to be a scam. One part of the illegality is actually on the front page of the solidcoin page "earn money . . . no startup investment".

There are other aspects of SC that breach the laws in the host jurisdiction, including the similarities to a pyramid scheme (that lovely "tax" function) in the way it's being done, but that's just part of the overall picture.